Serious objections were levelled at the composition of the court by, among others, August Vilhelm Pettersson from Köping and Robert Samuelsson (1886-1933, Communist), who did not believe that the judges’ juridical knowledge would be a guarantee for their impartiality.583 Carl Lindhagen stated that it could not be imagined that justice would be created in an instance where the chairman would have the deciding vote and for the most part be chosen from the so-called educated class.584 Similar strains, if less veiled, were be heard from the author and journalist, Fabian Månsson (1872-1938), who was known for his rich language. Månsson stated that: Nor did Arthur Engberg (1888-1944), journalist and subsequently Social Democratic minister of ecclesiastical affairs, mince his words, but instead argued that the bills were products of a perverted, otherworldly, legalistic, not to say legal hair-splitting opinion. One almost got the impression that the presence of a couple of famous lawyers in the Liberal government had affected the minister of health and welfare in his, in itself, very strong intention to successfully accomplish this matter. Engberg asked himself what the minister of justice, Johan Thyrén, could know p a r t i v, c h a p t e r 9 284 583 AK1928:38, p. 94; AK1928:38, pp. 62-64. 584 FK1928:13, p.16.The statement can be seen as a curiosity regarding Carl Lindhagen’s personal history, keeping in mind that his half brother, Arthur Lindhagen, would become the first and influential chairman of the labour court a few months later. 585 AK1928:38, p. 132 (Månsson). “When one knows what types, what homes, what circles from which professinallly experienced judges are usually recruited, when one knows that for the greater part they are representatives of purely capitalistic homes, or also, what is even worse, they are representatives of petty bourgeois homes, of that part of the bourgeoisie, which this government represents … then one has to express one’s strongest protest …These three will become representatives of that bureaucracy that feels little or nothing with society or the working class, but instead represents certain speculative interests, certain exploitation interests …They are the enemies of the working class, they are the friends of exploitation, they are the friends of the petty bourgeoisie, and they are the representatives of all the petty bourgeois, ridiculous views that this government expresses.”585
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=